Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2016-06-15/News and notes

Discuss this story

Thanks again, Sue.

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 23:17, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sue's compensation was declared when it was paid and not when the obligation was created, so the 990 form for 2016 will only be informative about Lila's terms if all monies flow/will have flowed in this calendar year. --Tim Landscheidt (talk) 23:26, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This organization probably only allows half-hour lunches, so the staff doesn't need to be re-trained each afternoon. - 12.206.20.19 (talk) 02:55, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WHAAAAAT??? She got paid 300k for 5 months of work????? She took Wikipedia form a growing #3 website in traffic to a footnote website with struggling volunteers. And she got 150k loss-of-opportunities bonus? She is doing nothing now, of course she stayed for an extra year when her last 5 months were compensated with 300k. That is 700k annualized salary for a foundation that has been begging its visitors to donate and her salary is 1% of all of that for a whole year. And people even say thanks for her not-only-ripoff but essentially complete destruction of the entire potential the foundation had in 2007??? “I categorize from 2007 until now as the decline phase of Wikipedia,” says Aaron Halfaker, a grad student at the University of Minnesota who has worked for the Wikimedia Foundation as a contractor and this year published the most detailed assessment of the problem. “It looks like Wikipedia is strangling itself for this resource of new editors.” What a pathetic end for Wikipedia to thank somebody who raped it monetarily and of its potential. Nergaal (talk) 03:28, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes it is worth paying to get rid of someone. Don't you think Wikipedia is much better now than in 2014, with the wp:developers fixing problems in 2015 noted by users for years? -Wikid77 (talk) 22:53, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but that doesn't mean you have to praise the shit work that someone did. Nergaal (talk) 19:02, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your math is as bad as your formatting and your rhetoric. You've taken a $165,000 one-time retention bonus and magically transformed it into a "700k annualized salary". Then you throw in the word "rape". That's just shameful. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 04:39, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree entirely with Smallbones. Nergaal, I'm going to take the liberty of removing the "big" syntax and the bolding: it's not normal talkpage formatting (certainly not for a stretch as long as that) and your comment might be taken more at face value without it—I think that's what you intend, isn't it? Tony (talk) 04:53, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You guys seem to be really happy with the place where Wikipedia is now (or was when she left) compared to what the projects looked like in 2008. Nergaal (talk) 19:02, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"She is doing nothing now" -- if this is true (I have no personal knowledge), it may be because she lost opportunities, which is what the bonus was intended to compensate for. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:13, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Or because nobody hired her after seeing how good of a job she did here. Nergaal (talk) 19:02, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The bonus she got is a big "Fuck You" to all the volunteer editors, the people who donated to the foundation and the other grunts building this encyclopedia. Thanks again, Sue.--Catlemur (talk) 16:06, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WMDE job advert

Regarding both the 'remote' and the 'reportedly, does not need German', this diff confirms the latter and casts some different light on the former. --Izno (talk) 11:55, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Form 990

I presume the "990" mentioned is Form 990?

"Return of Organization Exempt From Income Tax") is a United States Internal Revenue Service form that provides the public with financial information about a nonprofit organization."

Maybe a wiki-link is needed. 220 of ^Borg 06:03, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]